pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Is Zym actually sometimes usable ?  (Read 12632 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #50 on: March 17, 2009, 07:17 »
0
I do not know if the thread is appropriate for my question. I guess yes, since the thread is about usability and so is my question.

I uploaded several model releases. Now they are displayed as ID#xyz. Should I guess the correct model release to attach it to a photo? Should I attach all of them just in case? Why is model release management module missing?

My verdict: the site's usability is very shallow.

P.S. Zymmetrical inspectors reject pictures that are being sold very well in other agencies. Rejection reason is something like "The lighting and composition of this image limit its stock value." I can conclude that those inspectors have no idea on stock value  >:(

P.P.S. Honestly, I try to love the site and its conceptual model, but I always fail. Too many inconsitencies


zymmetricaldotcom

« Reply #51 on: March 17, 2009, 07:40 »
0
Xalanx- we do not quote review times at present. Usually it's a reasonable amount of time. :)

Nata- Direct from the model release upload screen: "The advanced upload option allows you to upload multiple files and files of large size while also providing transfer status. One limitation of this option is that you will need to add descriptions or other release-related data after the file has been uploaded by by clicking 'Edit' on each file."     
 - you need to add a description for the release forms. I guess this would be an extra step if you already used descriptive filenames for your release files, but some people don't: we need a way to reference the releases in an organized manner. I will get it on our to-do list to get changed so the original filename is at least referenced in the dropdown, it would be more helpful for sure.

As for rejections, as always, you are encouraged to post any examples you think may have inappropriately reviewed.  'Sold elsewhere' is not a specific review criteria for us.

« Last Edit: March 17, 2009, 07:51 by zymmetrical »

« Reply #52 on: March 18, 2009, 17:48 »
0
Since it becomes customary to report sales on the "low earner" sites, here my most recent sale (2009/03/05) at Zymmetrical. Earnings 18$.



I had a question about the payout method (PayPal) which apparently is done automatically over 10$. Since Paypal charges fees for payouts from some sites, wouldn't it be better to ask explicitly for payout or put the limit higher?

Xalanx

« Reply #53 on: March 18, 2009, 17:51 »
0
Congrats! I'll be following closely with sales, as soon as they finish reviewing my photos since some 5 days ago.  ;)

« Reply #54 on: March 18, 2009, 19:06 »
0
Congrats! I'll be following closely with sales, as soon as they finish reviewing my photos since some 5 days ago.  ;)

The review can take some time. My guess is that reviewers put more time in reviews than on large mass-production sites. Every reject was personal and motivated with some hints on how to improve/correct, if possible.

Zymmetrical and Cutcaster are the only selling midstock sites left after the debacle of LuckyOliver and FeaturePics. Whoever is complaining about the subscription trend should support these sites. My 2 cents.
« Last Edit: March 18, 2009, 19:13 by FlemishDreams »

Xalanx

« Reply #55 on: March 19, 2009, 00:45 »
0
Well then let's hope they last. I like the prices they put on my images.

« Reply #56 on: March 19, 2009, 03:38 »
0
Me too. They are both sites with a personal touch and good prices. So far I had one sale on each site. I really hope they do well in future.

zymmetricaldotcom

« Reply #57 on: March 19, 2009, 09:30 »
0
Thanks for the nice words.

Currently it's not programmed in but if you simply send a note via the support system to hold payments we would have no problem retaining the funds until you want to get paid. 

« Reply #58 on: March 19, 2009, 11:48 »
0
..Zymmetrical and Cutcaster are the only selling midstock sites left after the debacle of LuckyOliver and FeaturePics. Whoever is complaining about the subscription trend should support these sites...
I have made more with Mostphotos, Panthermedia and Rodeo, all midstock sites.  FeaturePics is slow but still way ahead of Cutcaster.  Zymmetrical were doing well but I have only had 1 sale this year, hopefully that will improve.
« Last Edit: March 19, 2009, 11:51 by sharpshot »

« Reply #59 on: March 19, 2009, 19:29 »
0
I have made more with Mostphotos, Panthermedia and Rodeo, all midstock sites.

I had quite some sales on Mostphotos too, April-May last year, when everybody had about the same rank. Nothing since then, but my rank is still around 50 and yours around 1030. That means you've spent a lot of energy on commenting and stuff. That's no critique by any means but it illustrates the fact that the social networking, grooming and shoulder-tapping aspect there is more important than the intrinsic value of the photos to get on the front page (and sell).

Cutcaster is OK but I feel the few sales there are just random hits by a very limited buyers base.

FeaturePics was very OK till half last year, then came to a sudden stop for me. Like any similar oddity, it probably has to do with the search engine. On some sites, you are the search engine's darling and you don't know why. On others, you just don't get airborne.

Zymmetrical: better than all 4 for me the past year, considering I just uploaded 1/2 of my port. But 2/3 of my sales there are people shots in situation, not (except 1) in studio set-up. It might be portfolio-dependent. Just wait and see who will survive. For them it's as tough as for us to survive in a market with too many suppliers.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
3 Replies
2225 Views
Last post November 28, 2006, 16:45
by a.k.a.-tom
0 Replies
1468 Views
Last post November 28, 2006, 03:08
by snem
16 Replies
6682 Views
Last post December 12, 2009, 13:43
by RacePhoto

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results